Azazel as the Celestial Scapegoat
an excerpt from A. Orlov “The Eschatological Yom Kippur in the Apocalypse of Abraham: Part I: The Scapegoat Ritual,” in: Symbola Caelestis. Le symbolisme liturgique et paraliturgique dans le monde Chrétien (Scrinium, 5; eds. A. Orlov and B. Lourié; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009) 79-111.
.... One of the challenges in arguing for a Yom Kippur setting in the Apocalypse of Abraham lies in the fact that the accounts of Abraham’s sacrificial practices lack any explicit reference to the two goats of biblical and rabbinic traditions. These emblematic sacrificial animals played a distinctive role in the Yom Kippur rite, wherein one goat was sacrificed to God and the other was released into the wilderness for Azazel.
Yet in the Apocalypse of Abraham, a writing which exhibits a great deal of influence from the Enochic tradition, allusions to the Yom Kippur ritual seem to be affected also by Enochic re-interpretation of the scapegoat imagery and especially the enhanced symbolism of its chief antagonist, the scapegoat Azazel, envisioned now not as a sacrificial animal but as a demoted celestial being. Scholars have previously noted that in the Book of the Watchers the scapegoat rite receives a striking, angelological reinterpretation in incorporating some details of the sacrificial ritual into the story of its main negative hero - the fallen angel Asael. Thus, 1 Enoch 10:4-7 reads:
And further the Lord said to Raphael: “Bind Azazel by his hands and his feet, and throw him into the darkness. And split open the desert which is in Dudael, and throw him there. And throw on him jagged and sharp stones, and cover him with darkness; and let him stay there for ever, and cover his face, that he may not see light, and that on the great day of judgment he may be hurled into the fire. And restore the earth which the angels have ruined, and announce the restoration of the earth, for I shall restore the earth ….
Several distinguished students of the apocalyptic traditions have previously discerned that some details of Asael’s punishment are reminiscent of the scapegoat ritual. Thus, Lester Grabbe points to a number of parallels between the Asael narrative in 1 Enoch and the wording of Leviticus 16, including “the similarity of the names Asael and Azazel; the punishment in the desert; the placing of sin on Asael/Azazel; the resultant healing of the land.” , Daniel Stökl also observes that “the punishment of the demon resembles the treatment of the goat in aspects of geography, action, time and purpose.” Thus, the place of Asael’s punishment designated in 1 Enoch as Dudael is reminiscent of the rabbinic terminology used for the designation of the ravine of the scapegoat (wdwdh / wrwdh tyb) in later rabbinic interpretations of the Yom Kippur ritual. Stökl remarks that “the name of place of judgment (Dudael – wrwdh tyb) is conspicuously similar in both traditions and can likely be traced to a common origin.”
Several Qumran materials also appear cognizant of this angelological reinterpretation of the scapegoat figure when they choose to depict Azazel as the eschatological leader of the fallen angels, incorporating him into the story of the Watchers’ rebellion. Thus, 4Q180 1:1-10 reads:
Interpretation concerning the ages which God has made: An age to conclude [all that there is] 2 and all that will be. Before creating them he determined [their] operations [according to the precise sequence of the ages,] one age after another age. And this is engraved on the [heavenly] tablets [for the sons of men,] [for] /[a]ll/ the ages of their dominion. This is the sequence of the son[s of Noah, from Shem to Abraham,] [unt]il he sired Isaac; the ten [generations …] […] Blank […] [And] interpretation concerning ‘Azaz’el and the angels wh[o came to the daughters of man] [and s]ired themselves giants. And concerning ‘Azaz’el [is written …] [to love] injustice and to let him inherit evil for all [his] ag[e …] […] (of the) judgments and the judgment of the council of […]
Lester Grabbe points to another important piece of evidence – a fragmentary text from the Book of Giants found at Qumran (4Q203). In this document the punishment for all the sins of the fallen angels is placed on Azazel. 
Later rabbinic materials also link the sacrificial animal known from the scapegoat ritual to the story of the angelic rebels. Thus, for example, b. Yoma 67b records the following tradition:
The School of R. Ishmael taught: Azazel – [it was so called] because it obtains atonement for the affair of Uza and Aza’el.”
As can be seen, the conceptual link between the scapegoat and the fallen angel is documented in a number of important materials across a substantial span of history. A broad scholarly consensus now recognizes this connection.
It appears that such an “angelological” pattern also operates in the Apocalypse of Abraham, where Azazel, like the antagonist of the Enochic tradition, is envisioned as a fallen angelic being. It has previously been noted that the Azazel story in the apocalypse reflects several peculiar details of the Enochic myth of the fallen watchers. Thus, for example, Rubinkiewicz argued that
… the author of the Apocalypse of Abraham follows the tradition of 1 Enoch 1-36. The chief of the fallen angels is Azazel, who rules the stars and most men. It is not difficult to find here the tradition of Genesis 6:1-4 developed according to the tradition of 1 Enoch. Azazel is the head of the angels who plotted against the Lord and who impregnated the daughters of men. These angels are compared to the stars. Azazel revealed the secrets of heaven and is banished to the desert. Abraham, as Enoch, receives the power to drive away Satan. All these connections show that the author of the Apocalypse of Abraham drew upon the tradition of 1 Enoch.
It is clear that in the Slavonic apocalypse, as in the Enochic and Qumran materials, Azazel is no longer a sacrificial animal, but an angelic being. Already in his first appearance in chapter 13:3-4, he is depicted as an unclean (impure) bird (Slav. птица нечистая). In the pteromorphic angelological code of Apocalypse of Abraham, which chooses to portray Yahoel with the body of griffin, the bird-like appearance of Azazel points to his angelic form.
The assumption that Azazel was once an angelic being is further supported by Apoc. Ab. 14 which tells about the celestial garment that the fallen angel once possessed: “For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him (Abraham)…”
Yet, in comparison with the early Enochic developments, the angelic profile of Azazel appears to be more advanced. Lester Grabbe suggests that in the depiction of its main antagonist the Apocalypse of Abraham seems to be referring to the “basic arch-demon complex under the name of Azazel.” In his opinion, there “Azazel is no longer just a leader among the fallen angels but the leader of the demons. Figures originally separate have now fallen together while the various names have become only different aliases of the one devil.”
 In this respect the authors of the Slavonic pseudepigraphon appear to be bound by the formative blueprint manifested in the biblical account of Abraham’s sacrifices found in Gen 15. Thus H. Box notes that "the apocalyptic part of the book is based upon the story of Abraham's sacrifices and trance, as described in Gen. xv." Box, The Apocalypse of Abraham, xxiv.
 On the Azazel traditions, see J. De Roo, "Was the Goat for Azazel destined for the Wrath of God?" Biblica 81 (2000) 233-241; W. Fauth, "Auf den Spuren des biblischen Azazel (Lev 16) : Einige Residuen der Gestalt oder des Namens in jüdisch-aramäischen, griechischen, koptischen, äthiopischen, syrischen und mandäischen Texten," ZAW 110 (1998) 514-534; E.L. Feinberg, "The Scapegoat of Leviticus Sixteen," BSac 115 (1958) 320-31; M. Görg, “Beobachtungen zum sogenannten Azazel-Ritus,” BN 33 (1986) 10-16; L.L. Grabbe, "The Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation," JSJ 18 (1987) 165-79; R. Helm, “Azazel in Early Jewish Literature,” Andrews University Seminary Papers 32 (1994) 217-226; B. Janowski, Sühne als Heilgeschehen: Studien zur Suhnetheologie der Priesterchrift und der Wurzel KPR im Alten Orient und im Alten Testment (WMANT, 55; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982); idem, “Azazel,” in: Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (eds. K. van der Toorn, et al.; Leiden: Brill, 1995) 240-248. B. Jurgens, Heiligkeit und Versöhnung: Leviticus 16 in seinem Literarischen Kontext (New York: Herder, 2001); H.M. Kümmel, “Ersatzkönig und Sündenbock,” ZAW 80 (1986) 289-318; R.D. Levy, The Symbolism of the Azazel Goat (Bethesda: International Scholars Publication, 1998); O. Loretz, Leberschau, Sündenbock, Asasel in Ugarit und Israel: Leberschau und Jahwestatue in Psalm 27, Leberschau in Psalm 74 (UBL, 3; Altenberge: CIS-Verlag, 1985); J. Maclean, "Barabbas, the Scapegoat Ritual, and the Development of the Passion Narrative," HTR 100 (2007) 309-334; J. Milgrom, Studies in Cultic Theology and Terminology (SJLA, 36; Leiden: Brill, 1983); D. Rudman, "A note on the Azazel-goat ritual," ZAW 116 (2004) 396-401; W.H. Shea, "Azazel in the Pseudepigrapha," Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 13 (2002) 1-9; D. Stökl Ben Ezra, “Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and the Roots of Jesus’ High Priesthood,” in: Transformations of the Inner Self in Ancient Religions (eds. J. Assman and G. Stroumsa; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 349-366; idem, “The Biblical Yom Kippur, the Jewish Fast of the Day of Atonement and the Church Fathers,” Studia Patristica 34 (2002) 493-502; idem, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity: The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century (WUNT, 163; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2003); A. Strobel, “Das jerusalemische Sündenbock-ritual. Topographische und landeskundische Erwägungen zur Überlieferungsgeschichte von Lev. 16,10,21f,” ZDPV 103 (1987) 141-68; H. Tawil, "cAzazel the Prince of the Steepe: A Comparative Study," ZAW 92 (1980) 43-59; M. Weinfeld, "Social and Cultic Institutions in the Priestly Source against Their ANE Background," Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem, 1983) 95-129; D.P. Wright, The Disposal of Impurity: Elimination Rites in the Bible and in Hittite and Mesopotamian Literature (SBLDS, 101; Atlanta: Scholars, 1987).
 Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, 87-88.
 R.H. Charles, The Book of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1893); D. Dimant, The Fallen Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Related Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (Ph.D. diss.; The Hebrew University in Jerusalem, 1974) [in Hebrew]; idem, “1 Enoch 6-11: A Methodological Perspective,” SBLSP (1978) 323-339; A. Geiger, “Zu den Apokryphen,” Jüdische Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Leben 3 (1864) 196-204; L.L. Grabbe, "The Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation," JSJ 18 (1987) 165-79; P. Hanson, “Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6-11,” JBL 96 (1977) 195-233; R. Helm, “Azazel in Early Jewish Literature,” Andrews University Seminary Papers 32 (1994) 217-226; G. Nickelsburg, “Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6-11,” JBL 96 (1977) 383-405; R. Rubinkiewicz, Die Eschatologie von Henoch 9–11 und das Neue Testament (tr. H. Ulrich; Osterreichische Biblische Studien, 6; Klosterneuberg, 1984) 88-89; D. Stökl Ben Ezra, “Yom Kippur in the Apocalyptic Imaginaire and the Roots of Jesus’ High Priesthood,” in: Transformations of the Inner Self in Ancient Religions (eds. J. Assman and G. Stroumsa; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 349-366; idem, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity: The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century (WUNT, 163; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2003) 85-88.
 Grabbe, “The Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation,” 153.
 Stökl Ben Ezra, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity: The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century, 87.
 Stökl Ben Ezra, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity: The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century, 87-88.
 Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 1.371-373. On the similar traditions see also 4Q181.
 Grabbe, “The Scapegoat Tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation,” 155.
 On this text see also L. Stuckenbruck, The Book of Giants from Qumran, 79-101.
4Q203 7:1-7 reads: “[…] … […] and [yo]ur power […] Blank Th[en] ’Ohyah [said] to Hahy[ah, his brother …] Then he punished, and not us, [bu]t Aza[ze]l and made [him … the sons of] Watchers, the Giants; and n[o]ne of [their] be[loved] will be forgiven […] … he has imprisoned us and has captured yo[u]…” Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 411.
 The Babylonian Talmud. Yoma (ed. I. Epstein; London: Soncino, 1938) 316. On the afterlife of the Asael/Azazel tradition see A. Y. Reed, "From Asael and Šemihazah to Uzzah, Azzah, and Azael: 3 Enoch 5 (§§7-8) and Jewish Reception-History of 1 Enoch," Jewish Studies Quarterly 8 (2001) 105-36; idem, What the Fallen Angels Taught: The Reception-History of the Book of the Watchers in Judaism and Christianity (Ph. D. Dissertation; Princeton, 2002); idem, Fallen Angels and the history of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
 B. Philonenko-Sayar and M. Philonenko, L’Apocalypse d’Abraham. Introduction, texte slave, traduction et notes (Semitica, 31; Paris, 1981) 31-33; R. Rubinkiewicz, L'Apocalypse d'Abraham en vieux slave. Édition critique du texte, introduction, traduction et commentaire (Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego: Źródła i monografie, 129; Lublin, 1987) 50.
 R. Rubinkiewicz, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; ed. J. H. Charlesworth; New York: Doubleday, 1985 ) 1.681–705, at 685.
 Apoc. Ab. 13:3-4 “And an impure bird flew down on the carcasses, and I drove it away. And the impure bird spoke to me …” Kulik, Retroverting Slavonic Pseudepigrapha: Toward the Original of the Apocalypse of Abraham (TCS, 3; Atlanta: Scholars, 2004) 20.
 The reference to the impurity of the “bird” betrays the connection to the scapegoat figure who in the materials pertaining to the Yom Kippur ritual is understood as an impure entity, a sort of a “gatherer” of impurity which contaminates anyone who comes in contact with him, including his handlers, who must perform purification procedures after handling the goat. Milgrom observes that Azazel was “the vehicle to dispatch Israel’s impurities and sins to wilderness/netherworld.” Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, 1621.
 On the pteromorphic angelological language of the Apocalypse of Abraham see A. Orlov, “The Pteromorphic Angelology of the Apocalypse of Abraham,” CBQ (2009) (forthcoming).
 A. Kulik, Retroverting Slavonic Pseudepigrapha: Toward the Original of the Apocalypse of Abraham (TCS, 3; Atlanta: Scholars, 2004) 20.
 Grabbe, “The Scapegoat tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation,” 158.
 Grabbe, “The Scapegoat tradition: A Study in Early Jewish Interpretation,” 158.